BoeingForEver From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 216 posts, RR: 0 Posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 4927 times:
i understand the new 777-200LR can make ny-sydney ...does anyone know what flying time would be...and does anyone plan on ordering it, or flying this route???
QFA001 From Australia, joined May 2000, 673 posts, RR: 54 Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4748 times:
Quoting BoeingForEver (reply 0): i understand the new 777-200LR can make ny-sydney ...does anyone know what flying time would be...and does anyone plan on ordering it, or flying this route???
The B772LR can do SYD-JFK eastbound but would struggle to come up with any meaningful revenue payload JFK-SYD westbound.
777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3036 posts, RR: 3 Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4744 times:
LAX-SYD is ~13-14 hours depending on the winds. I'd imagine JFK-SYD would be somewhere near 18 hours. A long damn time on an airplane in any case.
Antares From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 1402 posts, RR: 41 Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 4423 times:
Dream on, Qantas told investment analysts there was no way they would entertain the 777-200LR for SYD-LHR or SYD-JFK in either direction.
Personally I'd love to be able to fly such a route. But if it can't make money, or more importantly , make its intended destination under realistic conditions, its just not on.
The so called range payload diagrams both makers show off just never cut the mustard with customers like QF and SQ. The amount of bull merde that covers this industry is quite amazing at times.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4131 times:
Why? AA has no appreciable feed at JFK that they can't provide at LAX.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18867 posts, RR: 64 Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4065 times:
I keep reading threads like this, and never see a plausible reason for JFK-SYD non-stop service. If this route was lacking in service, QF would have extended their SYD-LAX-JFK route to more than 3x a week long ago. There's another current thread on this forum also stating there's a need for this service but without answering if it is a presumed or real need.
I can understand SQ flying EWR-SIN daily non-stop as SQ already developed a successful one-stop service between Singapore and New York, that they continue to operate via a different stopover point once the A345 nonstop was introduced.
JFK-SYD would entail a huge investment in terms of equipment and infrastructure for a route currently unable to support service more than 3x per week.
If there's something in this equation I'm missing, and not just pie in the sky wishing dreams would come true, I would think someone could clearly state the evidence to support a JFK-SYD nonstop and enlighten us all.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16261 posts, RR: 52 Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3711 times:
I could see CO ordering the 777-200LR and operating EWR-Sydney before Qantas or AA, the 777-200LR with it's GE engines are capatible with CO's existing fleet of 777s (AA uses RR power, and Qantas does not even operate the type).
Also CO would be in a position to better serve the route because of their strong EWR hub, before SQ launched their SIN A340-500 flights CO had the worlds longest nonstop EWR-Hong Kong.
If AA were ever to serve Sydney it would not be from JFK, most likely would be DFW, ORD or LAX.
Aerohottie From Australia, joined Mar 2004, 735 posts, RR: 3 Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3386 times:
I think QF would operate SYD-AKL-JFK with connecting traffic from MEL and BNE before operating SYD-JFK direct. I was led to believe that the only reason SYD-LAX-JFK was not daily was because of the lack of domestic traffic between LAX-JFK. Operating the flight via AKL would make much more sense.
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3007 times:
Quoting QFA001 (reply 1): The B772LR can do SYD-JFK eastbound but would struggle to come up with any meaningful revenue payload JFK-SYD westbound.
Given the current range of the 772LR is 9420nm (may still go up), making the 8646nm trip JFK-SYD would take some restriction but it would definately be commercially viable
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 216 posts, 
From Australia, joined May 2000, 673 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11318 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
